Skepticism

EVENTS

A metaobservation on misogyny

I know this fact hasn’t escaped most of the regulars here, but I just thought I’d note it formally.

1) PZ posts a remembrance of the 14 women killed and 10 injured by the misogynistic murderer responsible for the École Polytechnique massacre that took place 23 years ago today, and points out that the hatred that motivated the murderer is still all too common.

2) 12 comments in, the thread becomes about whether the particular rhetorical trope PZ used to point out the continued existence of misogyny was fair to misogynists, and is no longer about remembering the massacre victims.

There was a briefly popular bon mot that went around a few months back along the lines of “Every online discussion of feminism proves the necessity of feminism.” Add this to the pile.

In June I put together a hastily designed infographic and posted it to Facebook, where it has since gotten redistributed. It’s about the best, concisest way I can think of to convey how I feel about people one thread over complaining that PZ is being MEEEEEEN.

It’s worth noting that when I first posted it in June I spent the next couple days arguing with people quibbling — not over the facts represented, but whether I was trying to imply that being a woman in a relationship with a man was more dangerous than being a soldier. Or similar diversionary arguments. (No one objected to the design, which I sure as hell wish I’d thought through more clearly. But it’s escaped into the wild now, so oh well.)

Odd are that every one of those 11,766 women murdered — and of course that number has grown since June — was killed by someone who heard, and incorporated, anti-woman talk pretty much identical to the crap whose expression is being defended one thread down as “not the same as killing women.”

Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.

And when you essentially march into a memorial service to complain about that fact, you’re saying the victims aren’t as important as your right to deny the consequences of your actions.

Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.

You can call yourself or not call yourself whatever you want, but consider this. Nobody enjoys it more when a woman says she’s not a feminist than a misogynist. Nobody gets more gloatingly self-congratulatory about it, or happier about what “real” women don’t need than someone who doesn’t like women very much, especially not the uppity, outspoken, wanting pay equity and reproductive freedom types. Consider that any word that feared and derided has incredible power. And how beautiful and strong that makes it.

I’d say a reflection of this point applies here: If people get their knickers in a twist at the very mention of the word “misogyny” and its cognates, it only shows the real power of the word to name and shame.

Two-thirds of women who are murdered are killed by a current or former boyfriend or husband, so unfortunately it’s true that one of the best things a woman can do to avoid being murdered is not to get involved with a man. Fortunately, it’s a small probability overall.

To counter the claims of an MRA on YT, I looked up the actual statistics. Overall, the rates of spousal murder are roughly equal: for every 100 women murdered by their spouses, roughly 100 men are too. Fair’s fair, case closed, right?
No. Not when you consider that men get murdered more often for other reasons. The rate of spousal murder committed against men is about 1 in 10, whereas against women it’s 1 in 2!
What does that mean? Here’s how I like to put it: If you’re a homicide detective and you find the body of a male, chances are one in ten his spouse did the deed.
However, the same homicide detective knows that when he finds a woman’s body, chances are roughly 50/50 her husband did it!

Thanks for this, Chris and PZ. And a big thanks you to all the commenters here and throughout ftb. I’ve been a reader/lurker since well before egate and I’ve learned so much. I’m a better person for it and feel better prepared to help my daughter and son become kinder people than I was growing up. So you have made at least 3 less assholes/potential assholes in the world.

That’s what I don’t get about the misogyny deniers or whatever they are. I’ve read what you’ve all said, felt a bit stung, thought about and said, “Hey I have a chance not to be an asshole in this area of my life. That will make me a better person. I’m in.” What kind of person doesn’t want to better themselves and the lives of those around them? *shrug*

Damn. I get off of a long plane ride, check my favorite blog, and can only imagine what I missed in that thread. I’m just too tired to read it tonight, but let me say this: I know that when I read it tomorrow PZ, CC and especially the Horde will have once again given me hope for humanity. So thanks in advance. <3

Exceptionally well put, Chris. I have seen the graphic floating around, and it’s nice to make some sort of contact with the originator.
Osmosis also makes an excellent point – in fact, practically every police investigation into a woman’s suspicious death starts with a spouse/boyfriend as prime suspect.
Unfortunately, the assholes who haven’t actually murdered their wives don’t listen to any of this – they’re “innocent”.
It’s up to those of us who understand – either because we have experienced this in a personal way, or perhaps because some have better innate understanding – to shame the bastards with a simple: “That’s not funny.” It works best in a quiet, straight-forward voice, and turn away. No hysterics. No shouting. No anger. Just quiet disdain for words or actions stupidly executed.
Incidentally, whether you’re a man or a woman, if you think you haven’t been personally touched by violence against women through close association with a victim, then you haven’t been paying attention.

Odd are that every one of those 11,766 women murdered — and of course that number has grown since June — was killed by someone who heard, and incorporated, anti-woman talk pretty much identical to the crap whose expression is being defended one thread down as “not the same as killing women.”

Well, nearly every one of them. Unless your data specifically exclude it, there are probably a (very) few cases of legitimate self-defense.

Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.

Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls ~ “Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.”

ericyounstrom – “Oh… So everyone everywhere is responsible for any joke or slight, right? So if anyone hears a joke, slight, disrespect, ect… and thinks “you” got there back and kills or injures someone it is your fault for saying something?”

Oh… So everyone everywhere is responsible for any joke or slight, right? So if anyone hears a joke, slight, disrespect, ect… and thinks “you” got there back and kills or injures someone it is your fault for saying something?

Yes, we’re all responsible, at least those of us who are decent human beings. If you remain silent in the midst of rape “jokes” or complaints about those stupid bitches, ought to slap that shit outta her” and so on, you are contributing to a culture of toxic sexism which enables those who decide to commit violent acts.

Rape culture and violence against women proliferate. We’re all swimming in it. It won’t change unless people decide that a change is needed, and that change means making such rhetoric unacceptable, rather than providing quarter and comfort for such people.

You are either willfully misreading what was written, or you have some misogynist/ misogynist apologist issues.

h… So everyone everywhere is responsible for any joke or slight, right? So if anyone hears a joke, slight, disrespect, ect… an

Or you simply think in non-sequiturs. Whatever.

No, when your bros are bad-mouthing women for being women, calling them gender-specific slurs, and you don’t counter that, you’re an asshole too.

And before you find a new way to misinterpret or misrepresent what I said, no, this isn’t about being personally angry for a valid reason with a woman. Of course, if you want to stretch that anger and speak derogatorily of women and use gender-based slurs (which are only effective if you think something is innately wrong with women), then yeah, you’re part of the problem.

A joke that involves women? No problem. A joke that involves stupid negative stereotypes of women? Stupid and misogynist.

Are you legally at fault if one particular man you know murders his wife? No, probably not. Are you responsible for being part of the climate and culture of misogyny, which makes such violence OK in the minds of men? Yeah, you are.

I really thought that anyone who had any interest at all in how social interaction works negatively would have come across a concept like “there’s no such thing as a bystander”. It’s used a lot in discussions about bullying, whether workplace or school, but it really isn’t rocket science.

If you stay silent and/or passive when someone is speaking or performing violence against others, you are part of their support network. You didn’t ask for the role. You can’t escape the position you’re in except by speaking up directly or by finding someone else who can do that for you.

If you say nothing, you do nothing, you laugh – easily or reluctantly – you’ve been co-opted into something nasty. You have a choice thereafter to say it was a bad thing, to stay silent, or to agree with the wrong-doer.

Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.

“Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.”

to this:

So to you all words are the EXACT same as physical actions? Saying I hate is the same as killing a human being?

Not every post of PZ’s makes me cheer or swear or whatever. Not every post of anyone is great. So, I’ve read a few coyote crossing and pharyngula posts by you, Chris (well, all of the pharyngula ones), but I wasn’t thrilled you were brought on board. You were one competent blogger among many around these parts.

And then I read this. This is the kind of thing that PZ does every so often, that Crommunist does every so often, that simply makes those blogs must-read. This is the kind of post that shifts me from being happy to read what you write to being eager to read what you write.

Rock on.

==========
As a separate note, It was the writing that I was praising, not the graph. I’m with you on that one: the image could have been substantially better.
==========
Now I suppose I have to read all the comments, don’t I? ’cause there’s bound to be idiots here raising a fuss.

Well, that’s another thing about pharyngula I like: I have my first law-school final exam tomorrow and 4 more over the following 10 days. I really have no business taking the time to do that…

…but I dont’ have to b/c the Horde as a whole has it all taken care of even when a Hordeling or two has to take a step back.

Rock on, the rest of you as well. I’ll be much more active Dec 18th-Jan 1st… then back to the salt mines for 16 weeks b/4 summer and time to actually catch up w/ everyone.

These last two threads have put me in mind of Tim Minchin’s lovely “Pope Song,” which includes the lyrics…

If you cover for another motherfucker who’s a kiddie fucker
Fuck you you’re no better then the mother fucking rapist

…and then I wonder how many of these dudes showing up here to complain that it’s so unfair to draw moral equivalency between everyday, blogging, comment-trolling, rape-threat-making-on-Reddit misogynists and mass-murdering-IRL misogynists are huge fans of that song.

Funny, reading this thread and the last one I was thinking something very similar. Had PZ & Chris posted regarding the well-worn atheist argument regarding religious moderates enabling the existence of fundamentalists many of those complaining would be nodding their heads in agreement. It’s the exact same relationship between those those who talk misogynist crap and those who act on it.

In 2009 during the Homecoming Dance a 15 year old girl was gang raped for two and one-half hours in the schoolyard while DOZENS of “bystanders” watched, many of them reportedly taking cell phone videos and photos. Reportedly, because police have had no luck in getting anyone to surrender these videos and photos.

Of the dozens of bystanders, not one in the crowd outside that school called 911 during that 2-1/2 hours while she was being gang-raped, penetrated with various objects and kicked in the head repeatedly.

Only when an 18-year old woman who was not there but HEARD about if called the police was anything done. The victim was found unconscious under a picnic table and was airlifted to the hospital in critical condition.

7 were arrested, one released soon after for lack of evidence. He says he was just a witness and was there to offer her his shirt, and didn’t have a cell phone to call anyone. And he didn’t want to “be a snitch.”

So, 6 face trial. Out of a crowd of dozens of “bystanders” who watched and recorded an hours-long gang-rape.

Dunno why I am posting this. Something just reminded me of it somehow.

Thus, for those killed by lovers/spouses, we can derive the ratio of men:women = 269:1026, which is just a little less than 1:4, and specifically for spouses the ratio is around 1:5.

The data are limited in that they don’t tell us about homosexual relationships (some boyfriends will be killed by their boyfriends, and the tabulation doesn’t allow us to pull that information out). But I don’t see how you came to figure that for every 100 women killed by spouses, 100 men are too.

rocketman–this isn’t some new, earth-shattering idea. It’s been around for quite some time in that saying generally attributed to Edmund Burke (though he didn’t phrase it as such): “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

That’s exactly the same concept as this:

By not speaking up I am supporting the negative action of the individual committing it.

You can still choose to disagree with that, but please recognize that this isn’t some revolutionary idea. Just to phrase it one more way for you: Staying silent when someone says hateful or violent things about a group of people is giving tacit approval. You are allowing them to continue saying these things, without walking away, saying, “hey, that’s not cool”, or otherwise showing disapproval. This makes them think that sort of language (and ergo that sort of thinking) is acceptable.

above a comment about about homicide stats. and 50/50 and 1 in ten. I would bet more than even money of the wives that murdered their husbands by law were guilty but not without cause did they feel forced to act.

“Now, we have bad news to report that Tiller the baby killer out in Kansas, acquitted. Acquitted today of murdering babies. I wasn’t in the courtroom. I didn’t sit on the jury. But this, there’s got to be a special place in hell for this guy.” Bill O’Reilly

Anybody who’s read history can come up with dozens more. Must say, I am always boggled by those who protest that WORDS DON’T DO ANYTHING and yet simultaneously insistent on speaking. If they know their words are mere noise, what’s the point of speaking?

I posted this thought experiment on a thread in another forum. Maybe this will help clarify the matter.

Most people remember Lorena Bobbit, yes? Now what if her behavior was commonplace: we have severed penises littering the landscape. Were this the case, do you really think anyone would nitpick the data and parse the numbers to death?

“No, wait, are you sure it’s 100,000 and not 10,000? What about the re-attached ones? They don’t count, you know. And what if it’s not all the way severed? Are you counting those?”

Do you really think anyone would have a discussion like that? I don’t . I am certain everyone would Know and accept without question that we had a public safety disaster on our hands and something would be getting done about it. No one would dare joke about it – it would not be considered funny. Any woman who made a joke in public about snipping something tubular would find herself in a police interrogation room. Like saying “bomb” in an airport.

I think mysogynistic men have this attitude due to the loss of their favoured positions in society, loss of control, and disdain for competition, the mindset that women are inferior to men and that feminisms threatens their regime to be in control.
In the past, men didn’t have to put effort into their marriages because divorces were nonexistent. They could do whatever they wanted, especially adultery, without a word from their wives. Wow, what a life! Their penises were in heaven. Their jobs weren’t threatened by women in the workforce. They had complete control and could do whatever they wanted. Now, this is no longer the case and they resent this. It is very primitive and harmful to both men and women to think this way. Women are clearly intelligent,competent and capable beings. However some men apparently want a submissive doormat as opposed to an equal partner and strong asset.

I was going to use as examples: you wouldn’t want someone to call you a witch in mediaeval Europe; you wouldn’t want someone to call you a commie in 1950s America; you wouldn’t want to be a black man accused of lusting after white women in 1920s Louisiana; you wouldn’t want to be a child care worker called a satanist or an abuser in the 1990s; and so on.

“Sticks and stones” is a rhyme told to help people deal with being bullied. It’s not supposed to be an excuse to allow bullying to continue.

I drop in here once a year or so. The atheism+ concept never really sat well with me–too religious actually. So a parting essay. Apologies for the length. Apologies for the honesty as well Chris.

How noble your thoughts…i wonder though–have any of you ever been in a situation where your life was actually threatened when you stepped between a woman and the person assaulting her? I have. The stupid thing is about this present back and forth is that I have actually been the bystander who stepped in and yet I find myself questioning why I did it. I stepped in and instead of making me feel like a hero it made me terrified and left me feeling very much like a fool.

So my answer to the bystander question is maybe I’m not speaking up because I just don’t care.

Maybe I’m not objecting to the joke with a steely moral fervor because I found it funny and maybe just a little bit true in the transgressional way jokes sometimes are. So count me active in that sense.

Maybe when my friend is drunkenly ranting out some misogynist thoughts–it’s because he has a reason for doing so. He is angry at his wife and his mother-in-law and her sister who have all decided today he is a worthless piece of shit and he’s venting. When he sobers up and calms down I can make sure he isn’t going to do anything violent or stupid (to himself by the way) -while still not really giving a shit that your bullshit ivory tower outrage about his temerity in classifying an individual about one aspect of themselves would have you –have me– condemn him for his emotional response and some angry words, you know–defining him by one aspect of himself.

Maybe I’m objectifying a woman because at that time I don’t want an actual woman–all I want is to experience the physiological response my mind and body feel when considering a particularly attractive form because in that moment it is about my enjoyment and not about caring in the least of your deepest dreams and aspirations or who you really are as a person at that time.

Maybe Marc Lepine would have found something else to shoot some other group of people over if it hadn’t been this one. Perhaps jews. Perhaps christian day camp attendees and civil servants–perhaps high school students or members of the federal government. He was wired to hate. He was programmed to hate in a certain way–a mother out of her depth and a violent absentee father-who was himself a virulent and religiously motivated misogynist.

An isolated damaged loner got angry. An isolated damaged loner killed people. Is it that much more tragic because it was women? Why do I feel like it is–because I do–I feel it is more tragic because it happened to women–which in and of itself is a profoundly sexist thought…and it disturbs me to feel manipulated that way–

Heres the thing badflower, Chris–it is actually possible for a man to believe a woman should have the same rights, the same opportunities, the same respect and pay for a job done well; complete and total ownership of her person and the right to choose how it is used and still question the seeming imbalance of that choice after a child is born.

It is possible for a man to kiss his daughters before they go to bed and still cringe inside at some of the statements of gross entitlement that come from their mouths–it is possible for a man to quietly pay support to women who he really, really doesn’t like and to not raise a single word of complaint though his importance in the picture seems to fall somewhere between flute practice and visits with out of town friends. It is possible that a man can work with women who he respects professionally and who actually find him pleasant and competent enough to seek him out for advice and collaboration and still never let them one inch further inside than that; no matter how many times lunch or dinner is offered, or how many times a hand accidentally falls to touch his or how often the hair gets flicked back from a tilted head.

It is possible that when a psychotic off his meds shows up at that same office and starts menacing staff with a knife that he might be the only one in the office moving towards the man when the female staff are all running for cover… as if somehow their lives were more important than his and yet–he’s still doing it…and why? I don’t understand that–I don’t understand where that came from. (and then on top of that to feel utter shame at the fact that he couldn’t control his limbs from shaking–shaking during the situation–shaking afterwards–holding it together till I could get to the fucking bathroom and vomit.)

Or in another circumstance to have a five pound block of ice smashed into the side of his head for simply informing his wife that she was stepping over boundaries and the discussion was over–and to walk out instead of engaging in the slightest act of retaliatory violence. (And then to deal with the unbelievable lack of awareness that could have that same person expect–not ask–expect you to come back to the marriage after such a happening.) It is possible to be nice for the sake of the child when all you want to do is spit fire. It is possible to live a life where every single female you encounter comes to you wanting something from you– and yet who are surprised that you aren’t getting back on the horse one more time–surprised that you might not care enough to seek out the good in the next one who comes along.

It is possible for a man to sit and write this crap while a beautiful, intelligent, wealthy woman lies in his bed–wondering how he is going to tell her that it will never go any further than what it is right now; that her assumption of ownership over him has become too much to allow the relationship to go on and to yet still feel sad for the pain he will cause her.

I say this so you can understand that while I’m offended–deeply offended by the behavior of the women in my life; that in no way equates to the approval of, or acceptance of violence toward women merely because they are women.

I’m a misogynist because that is what is inside. I didn’t start out as one but I did end there. It is an evolved emotional shorthand because of the experiences I have had. I wish I had the stamina to tackle it–or the greatness of spirit to transcend it–but as of now I don’t–I simply don’t care enough to. It does not mean that I in anyway accept the actions of Lepine or others of his ilk. I cannot–because the very act of being a man–especially in relation to women–requires self control, abnegation of your selfishness to promote the greater good–it involves sacrifice; concepts so foreign to that twisted being that he didn’t qualify–like Brevik–or any of the others.

But you–with your simple black and white entitlement to your outrage add to this problem. You love the conflict so much. It appears to me you are far more outraged by the posting of a troll or two than the actual deaths. I’d expect it from 4chan –ah–who am i kidding–academics. So let me say this then.. I’ve paid my dues folks. I’ve paid women, I’ve raised daughters, I’ve been physically harmed defending women.

It’s possible to believe in equality for women without actually liking them all that much.

@71 It’s not very honest to do so, is it? I can’t say that the infographic’s analogy would turn out to be false and overstated if it were supplied with relative numbers (although I suspect that it would), but it’s really comparing apples and oranges at the moment.

I wonder how this kind of demagoguery is helping with the issue at hand.

.
Here’s a tiny violin playing for all the men who were unwillingly forced by women to become misogynists, all the white people unwillingly forced by non-white people to become racists, all the straight people unwillingly forced by gays to become homophobes, all the anti-Semites unwillingly forced by Jews to hate them, etc.

Yes, Beatrice, it is clear that women are such fucking horrible human beings that any rational man’s rational reaction to these women being female would have to be to “not care” and become misogynist.

Also, Marc Lepine would have killed any other group, he was born to kill dontcha know (what, did God decide that for him? Or is this EP?) his misogyny was just coincidental to his killing women for taking up spots “they didn’t earn” in a “man’s field” like engineering.

It all makes perfect sense, somewhere, once we accept that bitches, they aint shit.

Actually, branding Lépine as some sort of fairy tale monster that emerged from a wolf cave (where he was raised by wolves (possibly inside a vacuum inside a cave)) instead of out of a misogynistic culture we all live in is harmful.

With an added bit about “He was programmed to hate in a certain way–a mother out of her depth and a violent absentee father-who was himself a virulent and religiously motivated misogynist. ” Wtf?

Also note how genius writes that father himself was a misogynist, but that only “programmed” Lépine to become a murderous fuck, not a misogynist. Nope, he was just a monster out to kill someone. That it happened to be women… Oh well, it’s just not fair that feminists use him as an example of anything.

otranreg, like I said in the original post, there were assholes who tried to quibble about the numbers in an effort to deny the magnitude of the problem when I first posted the graphic. I tired of holding their hand through an analysis of the point that that many women being murdered is actually important, and I will be fucked if I’ll do it with you here.

have any of you ever been in a situation where your life was actually threatened when you stepped between a woman and the person assaulting her? I have.

So have I. I ended up bruised and bleeding for the experience. But I did put the fear_of_god into the attacker and he broke down and apologised profusely to his girlfriend. Would I step in again if a similar situation developed? Most certainly. But I do not think I would again throw myself in bodily in such a reckless fashion. I would scream blue murder, stop cars, phone police … anything to make it stop.

So my answer to the bystander question is maybe I’m not speaking up because I just don’t care.

I care all the more for my experience. I wish for no-one to go through the same. But even more, I wish for people to not stand by as a woman (or anyone) is being assaulted. But that is all the more reason to drag these issues into the open and resolve the underlying issues with words and ideas before things spill over into violence and vigilantism.

Rocketman, I don’t either feel like a hero for what I did. I cringe at the thought of what might have happened (if he was armed, had friends, things had gone otherwise…) I do feel obliged to step in though, if I do not stand against this shit then I stand for nothing. I just trust I have the presence of mind to do it in a more appropriate manner should the situation happen again.

rocketman, even if you really are as saintly a martyr as you paint yourself – and let’s say purely for the sake of argument that you are – do you really think that your individual experience somehow nullifies the experiences of the hundreds of thousands of women in the US alone who are threatened and assaulted by the men in their lives? For every one of those 11,766 (in the period covered alone) women who were murdered, how many do you think were assaulted?

If your ex-wife hit you, that’s wrong, I agree. But it doesn’t make the large numbers of women assaulted by their male relatives right, and it doesn’t in any way negate the fact that a woman is many times more likely to be the victim of domestic violence than the perpetrator.

I note that the person who identified himself as a misogynist, on being told he was not welcome, responded by posting four screens worth of blather. Pathologically unable to heed boundaries other people set.

rocket man I would sincerely suggest that you look in to getting some personal counseling because if you were being honest in your farewell post here it is clear that what you have been doing up to now is not working particularly well for you. Being alive and trying to have relationships with other people is difficult for everyone those of us who have been repeatedly hurt by others often benefit from professional help in times of difficulty.
To retreat into resentment and self pity followed by anger and hate does not lead to a good outcome.
I think the thing to get out of these subjects if nothing else is at least self awareness. Am I aware of how what I say effects others.
Is that what I really want to do?
As you have said it it is not rational but emotional and like to old saying says what goes around comes around.

The rate of spousal murder committed against men is about 1 in 10, whereas against women it’s 1 in 2!

And you know how it is called then? A family drama. A family drama.Some guy can’t take the fact that his wife/girlfriend dumps him and then he goes on to kill her and probably the children, too, and then people talk about a family drama. And how could such a nice man do such a thing?*
I can tell them, it’s because he sees women as property and is a misogynist murderer.
That’s not a family drama. A family drama is when somebody has cancer or gets seriously hurt/killed in a car crash.

*Unless he happens to be muslim, in which case it is an honour killing and irrefutable evidence that muslims really aren’t our kind of people.

rocketman
So my answer to the bystander question is maybe I’m not speaking up because I just don’t care.
Yeah, why would you care when women get raped and killed. I guess you thank god in the morning that he didn’t make you a woman.

Maybe when my friend is drunkenly ranting out some misogynist thoughts–it’s because he has a reason for doing so. He is angry at his wife and his mother-in-law and her sister who have all decided today he is a worthless piece of shit and he’s venting.

So, because some individual people were nasty to him he feels justified to paint 51% of the world’s population with a broad brush and make dehumanizing comments about them. Just like because the guy who tailgated my was black I’m justified in ranting about those fucking n***s, totally no problem.
I guess his wife, mil and her sister were right: He is a worthless piece of shit and you, too.

while still not really giving a shit that your bullshit ivory tower outrage about his temerity in classifying an individual about one aspect of themselves would have you –have me– condemn him for his emotional response and some angry words, you know–defining him by one aspect of himself.

So, while it’s totally OK for him to classify 51% of the population by a characteristic they can’t do anything about and that has nothing to do with their character it’s unfair of us to judge your imaginary friend by something he actually does.

Maybe I’m objectifying a woman because at that time I don’t want an actual woman

There’s help for that and they come in discreet flat boxes.

because in that moment it is about my enjoyment and not about caring in the least of your deepest dreams and aspirations or who you really are as a person at that time.

Yeah, why would women object to such a person who only sees them as a fuckhole and completely doesn’t give a shit about the fact that they’re human beings. Clearly, an egoist is somebody who doesn’t think about you first!

Maybe Marc Lepine would have found something else to shoot some other group of people over if it hadn’t been this one.

Maybe there is a Loch Ness monster!
I mean, why talk about the things we know when we could make up other stuff!

He was wired to hate. He was programmed to hate in a certain way–a mother out of her depth and a violent absentee father-who was himself a virulent and religiously motivated misogynist.

Oh, wait, did you just admit that misogynists influence other people to become misogynists, too, including those who commit mass murder?

That’s always such a handy explenation. We just can’t do anything about such things, really, they inevitably happen!

Is it that much more tragic because it was women? Why do I feel like it is–because I do–I feel it is more tragic because it happened to women–which in and of itself is a profoundly sexist thought…and it disturbs me to feel manipulated that way–

Thank you, Chris. And thank you, PZ. Every time this tide of hate gets unbearable and I start to think that it can never get better for women, I remind myself that there are plenty of male feminists around – Pharyngula is living proof – and that you do Get It too. We (women) are not alone. We have support.

* If you hear the other men around you talking and joking constantly about how you can’t trust something that bleeds for five days and don’t die and extend that thought to “If you can’t trust them, then you also can’t trust their abilities as engineers, responsible for the structural safety of thousands. I’d be saving thousands of lives if I can prevent women engineers” – is that deluded? Is that “crazy”? Does that indicate mental illness?

* If you hear the other men around you talking often about how women are suddenly competing in fields where men never faced competition before and how unfair that is to that one man who didn’t get into the 7/1 ration engineering program because a woman “took” that spot, and everyone knows that women aren’t as intelligent as men, and YOU YOURSELF could have gotten into that engineering program you’ve wanted to get into but couldn’t for years, if it wasn’t for the fact that feminists has changed the world so that that women was able to “take” “your” spot, is that crazy? Does that indicate a mental illness?

I can go on and on, about the narratives of women not putting out for “beta males” and George Sodini feeling like he was entitled to fucking a woman so when he couldn’t find one to fuck he shot up a gym full of women to punish them, or Breivik and his liberal feminist immigrants angst and how it was fed by pervasive social narratives, but you get the point.

That these men reached these conclusions does not indicate mental illness (as the Swedish courts recognized thankfully), it indicates that there are huge problems in our pervasive social narratives because each of these men?

They were honestly thinking that they were doing the morally superior thing that those other men, the ones talking around them every day about these very same things, don’t have the courage to actually do.

He murdered five women and two men so he was not purely misogynically motivated, but his mental instability came to a crisis point after a breakup. I lack the insight in psychopathology to state wether he had similarities to the École Polytechnique murderer.

“Women; always with the hitting people with things, the bitching people out, the getting others to want to hit them, the trying to screw me, like, constantly – every damn day, hair flicks. Where’s a man supposed to find the time? – and wanting some emotional connection.
And yet, and yet, they want me to treat them like individuals!
Well, I just think all that speaks for itself…”

I’m sorry, I’m not trying to straw man or parodise rocketman’s effort (…well, maybe a little), but that really is as close as I could get to discerning any sort of point.

Just to clarify – I am no relation to rocketman. We may have similar names, but I am just a long-time lurker who enjoys watching the Horde tear into idiots. I have no tongue for participating. One quick point – as a big lug myself, a perfect example of Schrodinger’s Rapist; I decided to learn how to relate to people in the most relaxed and non-threatening ways possible. It’s easy and requires no hatred or whining on my part. The rewards far outweigh any that a MRA or PUA could reasonably expect in the same situations. Good relationships, good friends, and a thoroughly enjoyable personal life, if any of them are reading and are interested. Any of these jerkstains can learn the same, and they deserve the forceful correction the commentariat directs at them, as long as they remain willfully ignorant. Good job, medals all around.

Chris, thank you very much for this post.
I’ve been working through some of the other similar comment threads on FtB lately, and frankly, they terrify me. But for that very reason, posts like yours are important, because, as terrifying as some of the hateful comment(er)s are, these posts do a lot (in my mind) to work in the opposite direction – that is, restore some faith in humanity. Because for all of the haters, there are many, many more willing to stand up to them and fight them (at least here).
And that is reassuring, even if the statistics aren’t.

I don’t even understand how “oh, he was damaged” is supposed to function as a dismissive statement the way douchebags like rocketman are using it–“he was just damaged, so we don’t need to look for any external reasons that might have helped this happen”. Doesn’t that very obviously raise the question of who or what damaged him, and might it/they also be damaging other people?

Apparently no, nothing or nobody damaged him, he just was damaged. This is the sort of weaselly bullshit that gives the passive voice a bad name.

I didn’t bother with the comments, although i appreciated the post. MRA-types are the reason I don’t hang around on feminist blogs anymore (at least, public feminist blogs) because they always, ALWAYS manage to derail the discussion with their whining. The last feminist blog on which I was active, actually, was Salon’s Broadsheet. And if we ignored them outright, they would shout and scream and post things that were increasingly vile and hateful. And this would happen regularly. In fact, it got to the point where the first two or three comments were from men’s rights trollers, because, for example, a tiny perccentage of rapes are perpetrated by women against men, how about that? It happens! And circumcision! Worse than female genital mutilation! Because even when men are not the focus of a post, IT’S STILL ALL ABOUT THEM.

What made it really special was that at some point in the comment thread the marijuana legalization folks would show up to make the point that if only pot were legal in the U.S., girls in Ghana would not have their genitals mutilated. Or something like that.

Chris, the statistics you present and contrast are worth further consideration.

I wonder, now that we know males are committing these crimes at this rate, can you tell us anything more about these males?

things like age..religious affiliation or lack thereof..geographic location…blood type…occupation or lack of……presence or absence of tatoos…. or any other descriptive characteristic that might be of use. Perhaps we could narrow these combatants to something less than 49.1% of the population and target our violence reduction efforts accordingly.

I strayed into the other thread briefly, but felt sick and left again. I just *really* don’t get some people.

There were some comments further up this thread about remaining quiet during rape jokes and how that makes people complicit in rape culture and I totally I agree. I’ve started calling my friends on it now when they do it and they always give the same, shocked response… “But it’s only banter”. *sighs* I think I have a lot of work…

This is an important message Chris, and one that needs to be seen more widely. Well done.

As for all the oh-so brave defenders of the poor oppressed misogynists; it saddens me that there are people in the world who can look at the statistics for the misogyny inspired murder of women and how terrifyingly commonplace it is, and yet their first response is not to consider what can be done to protect women and work towards a society where such violence is a thing of the past, but instead complain about the tone of those who point out that something needs to be done, and to whine about how mean we are being to the pathological woman-haters – anything to divert attention away from the rampant, institutionalised misogynistic rot at the heart of our culture.

I would ask how such people can live with themselves, but that would presuppose their possession of a conscience…

But what the heck, if my mama didn’t want me I guess I would be better off dead.

Give em all Darwin Awards!

How, exactly, does women exercising their bodily autonomy to be more than living incubators amount to an argument against opposing misogyny in society?

Has it occured to you that you had no right in your mother’s flesh when you were a foetus? That she remained a human being while pregnant, and not merely a delivery system for you? By what right to you claim that state or church can compel a woman to allow a foetus to parasitise her body against her will?

But what the heck, if my mama didn’t want me I guess I would be better off dead.

Give em all Darwin Awards!

Can’t tell if this is serious or sarcasm.

But for any who would consider this serious, have you ever heard of k vs r reproductive strategies? Or the concept of delayed gratification? Or even more simply, if the physical and/or economic consequence of having one child now would impair or prevent the potential for having (raising and supporting) two children later, what would be the most optimal Darwinian strategy?

Oh, and about the Darwin Awards? They have a criteria that requires the actions to be inadvertent. Those who DELIBERATELY reduce their chances reproducing, by actions such as celibacy, or suicide, or voluntary sterilization, or, say, choosing to have an abortion, DO NOT QUALIFY.

Because, you know, humans are free agents, with free will, and are (supposedly) free to individually tell their genes to take a jump in the lake.

The abortion rate for 2009 was 15.1 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years and the abortion ratio was 227 abortions per 1,000 live births.

So, if you already know you’re pregnant, your risk of miscarrying before 20 weeks is probably somewhere between 10% and 20%, and the rates of miscarriage are highest in the first trimester (the first 12 weeks).

In the U.S., the birth rate is currently 13.9 per 1000 people, or roughly 4,000,000 births. The first article says the current number of abortions is roughly 800,000. If miscarriages always happened before abortions, miscarriages would claim 600,000 to 1,200,000 fetal lives. If miscarriages always happened after abortions, miscarriages would claim 400,000 to 800,000 innocent feti. In other words, miscarriages results in roughly as many dead fetuses as abortion. But, bizarrely, the Fetal Rights Movement doesn’t give a fuck about that. Makes ya think. Well, it makes us think. The pro-fetus brigade cannot be made to think. They’ve built up an immunity.

I wonder, now that we know males are committing these crimes at this rate, can you tell us anything more about these males?

things like age..religious affiliation or lack thereof..geographic location…blood type…occupation or lack of……presence or absence of tatoos…. or any other descriptive characteristic that might be of use.

Anyone else find md’s post creepy? Like “let’s see if we can find a minority group to blame all this on” kind of creepy?

Here’s a belated reply to rocketman’s Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade of Self-Pity at #85:

Dude. Man up.

I could go toe-to-toe with you on the “hard done by” scale and swap stories about how shitty I’ve been treated by women in the past. Have the experiences turned me into a misogynist? No, they have not. For one thing, each past situation is particular to its context (the personalities and situation involved), and I’m enough of a grown-up to know that one person’s behavior doesn’t reflect upon the entirety of their gender, any more than it would, say, their race. Also, I have to think back and consider — it taking two to tango and all — that I may have been something of a jerk in a few of those situations myself.

I get that you’re feeling hurt and need a hug or something. We’re all human in that regard. But going Full Metal Whiner is the very opposite of manly behavior, and what I find remarkable is the way present-day misogynist culture has tried to make it so. The MRA community consider themselves the Manliest Men in Manopolis for standing up to the nefarious threat of castrating feminism, yet all I see are a bunch of cry-baby boys.

Just a point in passing, but the whole idea of ‘manly behaviour’ and ‘manning up’ are pretty toxic – they imply that such attributes as integrity and the ability to face adversity with equanimity are specifcally masculine attributes, and so are defined in opposition to the notional ‘fragility’ of womanhood. The term is also commonly used to shame men who don’t perform their gender with the culturally mandated level of unemotional stoicism.

All in all, it is probably best to avoid that particular set of phrases altogether.

(No one objected to the design, which I sure as hell wish I’d thought through more clearly. But it’s escaped into the wild now, so oh well.)

From my own experience releasing such, if you think of significant improvements down the road, you can make a “version 2″ of the image macro, and release it. If the mutant variant actually is a significant improvement, it will tend to out-compete the prior version; the more improved, the faster it will happen.

It’s quite analogous to evolutionary process, save at how the mutation arises. There probably will remain a few “living fossils” of the earlier version in circulation, they tend to have a miniscule role in the ecology. It’s also possible that v2 will miserably fail to catch on, indicating its not as much of an “improvement” in some respect as you’d thought.

Gregory Greenwood @ 127: I meant the terms as a way of saying “be an adult,” not in a gender-specific way. To the kind of men to whom “manliness” is an important concept, it’s a way of communicating to them in language they’ll (hopefully) understand.

I meant the terms as a way of saying “be an adult,” not in a gender-specific way. To the kind of men to whom “manliness” is an important concept, it’s a way of communicating to them in language they’ll (hopefully) understand.

Fair enough. I just thought it worthwhile to make the point in passing given the gendered connotations of those phrases.

I like info graphics, Chris, and I’m happy you posted this. However, a better comparison would be

men killed by women in relationships
women killed by men in relationships

That comparison would be much more revealing.

Would it be, though? One of the things that came to my mind after seeing this was that I haven’t seen a trillion dollars spent on domestic violence in the past ten years. And along those lines, consider the amount of attention to (and rhetoric of) the War on Terror and compare it to the issue of women being murdered by their spouses.

One last very short thought. For all of my problems with the women in my life–I have actually been personally responsible for implementing both policy and legislation specifically to prevent violence against women. To be clear, many women would be at considerable risk of rape or other violence if I had not fought to push through the legislation to protect their identities and locations. I’m the one who did the research to back it up–I’m the one who risked his job to make it clear to the PTB that the risk was real and that they needed not only to change their plans but to also prevent even the accidental disclosure of this information. I have walked this process from conception to implementation in spite of my personal wariness against the distaff folk.

So what the fuck exactly have you done? Except piss and moan on the internet? Post a nice graphic? Engage us all with your biting rhetoric and the vitriol of your white first world ivory tower outrage? What the fuck have you actually done to face down this problem you are so concerned about assholes? Internet rage! Allow me a slow clap to show my appreciation.

See I don’t like anybody very much. Misanthrope was the word they used to use. Look up the etymology of that one. It’s because you are not as individual as you think you are. Your violence may not be physical—your choice of targets far more politically correct–but if you are going to push the point that opinion and language is specifically tied to actions–then you are actually no better than the people you are criticizing. No different from them really.

See I don’t like anybody very much. Misanthrope was the word they used to use.

As long as you understand these are your psychological issues, and stop trying to shift the blame for how you are onto women, maybe you’ll get somewhere. Until then, you’re clearly a very unhappy and angry person, and no one can repair that brokenness but you. Good luck in life. You have my sympathies.

One last very short thought. For all of my problems with the women in my life–I have actually been personally responsible for implementing both policy and legislation specifically to prevent violence against women.

See I don’t like anybody very much. Misanthrope was the word they used to use. Look up the etymology of that one. It’s because you are not as individual as you think you are. Your violence may not be physical—your choice of targets far more politically correct–but if you are going to push the point that opinion and language is specifically tied to actions–then you are actually no better than the people you are criticizing. No different from them really.

You knew this thread wasn’t about you before you even clicked on it so I’m not sure why you insist on being such a fucking baby about it continuing to not be about you.

Because if this conversation was actually about who is better than everybody else, as rocket man seems to think, things like that might matter. I thought it was about misogyny and whether it’s harmful, but apparently I was mistaken.

Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaidensays

Actually, no. Not in the simple form Chris created above. Chris’ graphic does not say anything about the circumstances of the killing.

One of the most amazing statistics I’ve heard is that from the early 70s to the late 80s or 90s (forget when the study period ended), intimate partner murders of men by women fell by nearly 2/3rds. Intimate partner murders of women by men stayed roughly even.

The rise of the shelter system for battered women dramatically protected MEN. As access to that shelter system is decidedly uneven and inadequate, it is statistically guaranteed that there are still significant killings of men by women that would not occur if the women in the relationship felt she had a way to get safely away from the violence in the relationship.

This doesn’t say anything about how that violence originally arises, merely that women kill partners out of fear and not seeing another way out – today we often call this battered women’s syndrome, a form of self-defense, though it probably includes cases that aren’t actually within the definition of BWS.

So if we had a chart of those murder rates (men killing women vs. women killing men) in intimate relationships, we still wouldn’t know how to compare those numbers. What percent of those killings involve men who feel honestly desperate and kill out of a last-resort conception of self defense? How many women do?

Although the overall risk of homicide for women was substantially lower than that of men (rate ratio [RR] = 0.27), their risk of being killed by a spouse or intimate acquaintance was higher (RR = 1.23). In contrast to men, the killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18).

One last very short thought. For all of my problems with the women in my life–I have actually been personally responsible for implementing both policy and legislation specifically to prevent violence against women. To be clear, many women would be at considerable risk of rape or other violence if I had not fought to push through the legislation to protect their identities and locations. I’m the one who did the research to back it up–I’m the one who risked his job to make it clear to the PTB that the risk was real and that they needed not only to change their plans but to also prevent even the accidental disclosure of this information. I have walked this process from conception to implementation in spite of my personal wariness against the distaff folk.

Let me assume for a moment that this is nothing but the unvarnished truth – so what? How does this excuse your championing of misogyny on this thread, or the last one memorialising the victims of misogynistic violence? How does this make it alright for you to complain about tone when people speak up against the systemic oppression and hatred of women in society?

You clearly wish to claim you are an ally, but what good you may have done in the past does not excuse the harm you are doing right here, right now.

So what the fuck exactly have you done? Except piss and moan on the internet? Post a nice graphic? Engage us all with your biting rhetoric and the vitriol of your white first world ivory tower outrage?

‘Dear Muslima’? Really? You honestly want to go there?

Misogyny is not an issue that is only a problem in the Western world, and nor are the people suffering its effects, and fighting against it, all White. Do not attempt to use race to divert attention away from the issue of misogynistic violence and its relationship to hate speech against women. I would also ask you to think long and hard about why you think that the deaths of 11,766 women over eleven years due to sexist violence is some irrelevant ‘ivory tower’ issue. These women are needlessly dead due to a rampant form of violent bigotry in our society. If that is not worth addressing, than what issue is?

It seems that when you admitted to being a misogynist in the last thread you were being nothing less than honest.

See I don’t like anybody very much. Misanthrope was the word they used to use. Look up the etymology of that one. It’s because you are not as individual as you think you are. Your violence may not be physical—your choice of targets far more politically correct–but if you are going to push the point that opinion and language is specifically tied to actions–then you are actually no better than the people you are criticizing. No different from them really.

So, in the world according to rocketman, calling out rape and death threats against women as unacceptable is… no better than making rape and death threats against women? That transparently false equivalency is honestly the best stab at a rebutal you can conjure?

By the way, “misanthropy” is a tired cop-out. Whenever someone tries to excuse their misogyny or other targeted hatred with “Oh I hate everyone, man”, I wonder when they’ll take down their Nine Inch Nails posters and move out of their parents’ house.

Yes, even when they also talk about being or having been married or showing other evidence of adulthood.

Misogyny is not an issue that is only a problem in the Western world, and nor are the people suffering its effects, and fighting against it, all White.

Interesting point of historical fact. The most effective thing the “Western” world has ever done, with respect to helping other people elsewhere with any number of prejudices, bigotries, or other social injustices, has been to get its own house in order on that issue, and in so doing become an example which others voluntarily imitate.

Whereas going out there directly to impose a set of values on others, whether by soft power or hard, when such values are imperfectly practiced back home if at all, generally doesn’t work so hot.

The human brain is actually pretty good at picking up hypocrisy. That was likely one of the things it evolved for.

So, with respect to the ‘Dear Muslima’ crowd, if one is really interested in social justice for all humans, everywhere, then what one should NOT do is get in the way of those fighting for it right here at home and trying to make their own corner of the globe and example for the rest of the world to follow.

To counter the claims of an MRA on YT, I looked up the actual statistics. Overall, the rates of spousal murder are roughly equal: for every 100 women murdered by their spouses, roughly 100 men are too. Fair’s fair, case closed, right?

No. Not when you consider that men get murdered more often for other reasons. The rate of spousal murder committed against men is about 1 in 10, whereas against women it’s 1 in 2!

Thanks for this – I came into the comments specifically to get some perspective for this. While I don’t doubt any of the statistics in the original post, when I see stats that lead to conclusions I disagree with in a similar format (showing scale without context or similar), I tend to be sceptical. However, it’s harder to do this when you already agree with the conclusion they’re supporting, so I wanted to verify (as you did) that they actually do support the view that they’re being used to support, rather than, say, demonstrating an unrelated phenomenon (such as that domestic abuse, regardless of gender, is much more prevalent than other scary things that kill people).

So, again – thanks for providing the perspective to confirm the usage here.

——

chrislawson @ 63:

But I don’t see how you came to figure that for every 100 women killed by spouses, 100 men are too.

I’d assume that they were comparing all male-relationship murders with all female-relationship murders (inlcuding mother/father, son/daughter, sister/brother). As you pointed out, though, these aren’t spousal relationships, so they only count as male:female, not husband/boyfriend:wife/girlfriend.

(For reference, the male:female murder count from your link was 748:886, which is still lopsided, but much less so than 1:4 or 1:5)

——

otranreg @ 86:

I can’t say that the infographic’s analogy would turn out to be false and overstated if it were supplied with relative numbers (although I suspect that it would)…

I like info graphics, Chris, and I’m happy you posted this. However, a better comparison would be

men killed by women in relationships
women killed by men in relationships

See my previous comment to chrislawson for raw numbers with regards to this – if you take all male:female relationships, it’s approximately 4:5. If you just take partner relations (husband/boyfriend:wife/girlfriend), it’s approximately 1:4, using 2011 data.

However, as Ze Madmax @ 134 points out, this is a making an entirely different point than the one the original infographic is making, namely the comparison to fatality rates of one side in various wars.

P.S. I have no idea how, if your original screed is even remotely truthful, how you ever get women to sleep with you. The fact that your hatred for them is not immediately and visibly apparent scares the everloving shit out of me.

I have no idea how, if your original screed is even remotely truthful, how you ever get women to sleep with you.

Oh, I can see it, easily. Out of that rather remarkable whine, however, I was more amused by the standard need to mention that yes, he does indeed get laid, because he’s a manly alpha man, ya know, and all us ladeez are a’ missin’ out.

They never seem to realize just how cookie cutter they are or that outside of their misogynist pals, no one cares about their sex life.

Gen, I, too, am disgusted at how the cesspools of hate always shift the blame for the products of their hate onto “lone crazies”. Even when there’s no evidence of mental illness I notice the foremost question on many people’s minds after such tragedies to be “well what can the killers be diagnosed with?” It’s especially the people who promote such hate that are so eager to distance themselves through labeling as though declaring someone an “isolated damaged loner” by fiat from the comfort of an armchair is enough to consider them so far removed from the rest of humanity to the point where nothing anybody else did or said could have possibility contributed to this in any possible way.

My personal favorite of rocketman’s justifications for misogynist culture is that this “lone crazy” probably would’ve just ended up batting for a different team of hate anyway as though the fact that others exist is reason enough to not lift a finger to try to get rid of this one. It closely parallels the climate change denialist argument that even if global warming is a serious problem it’s inevitable so we should just keep the air pollution rolling and not rock the industrial boat.

All right, this is ridiculous. I do not apologize for misogyny in any way, but if PZ’s post was meant to be a “memorial service”, then he misappropriated it himself when he chose to end it with an extremely inflammatory statement.

To complain about other people commenting in response to what PZ said because they shifted attention away from the memory of the victims is incredibly hypocritical.

All right, this is ridiculous. I do not apologize for misogyny in any way, but if PZ’s post was meant to be a “memorial service”, then he misappropriated it himself when he chose to end it with an extremely inflammatory statement.

Misappropriated?

Do you actually think it’s a misappropriation to talk about anti-feminism on the anniversary of the murder of women by a killer who targeted feminists?

All right, this is ridiculous. I do not apologize for misogyny in any way, but if PZ’s post was meant to be a “memorial service”, then he misappropriated it himself when he chose to end it with an extremely inflammatory statement.

Sniveling about how we’re not nice enough to misogynists fits pretty squarely in the realm of apologia, fyi.

I’ve been trying to figure out what was getting under my skin about rocketman’s posts, and I mean more than the usual misogynistic crap. I think it is the constant underlying implication that he is such a great guy and entitiled to female admiration and the bitches still hate him. Look, he stood up for women and everything! I am thrilled that this scumsucker wants to take his ball and go home.

And as for our “Ivory tower” view of gender violence, I call bullshit. I know that I have witnessed more than enough violence for several lifetimes, and I have been reading this blog and its comments long enough to know that I am not alone. Unlike this guy, I don’t see why I should blame half the population for one man’s behavior. I do, however, have a special hatred for one sub-group of men: men who hate women.

I know that I have witnessed more than enough violence for several lifetimes, and I have been reading this blog and its comments long enough to know that I am not alone.

No, you aren’t. Too many of us have witnessed violence, intervened in violence and been the victims of violence.

The ‘Ivory Tower/First World’ nonsense leaves me amused. It’s always the same assumption, ignoring the fact that this blog is global in nature and, given that it’s text based, you have no idea of who you’re talking with unless they choose to let you know.

Just reading my posts doesn’t inform one that I’m a 55 year old, a bisexual, a woman or that I’m mixed race. That sort of thing fudges up their handy, labeled boxes.

Osmosis@24 provided false data saying that male:female spousal murders were about even numbers. I linked to official FBI data showing that the male:female spousal murder rate is about 1:5.

For you to claim that Osmosis was actually talking about all relationship murders is wrong. Osmosis very clearly stated that the numbers were for spousal murders. It’s even in the bit you quoted in your comment.

So you defended those figures even after you could see that they were way off base, made up a story about what Osmosis really meant that was at odds with Osmosis’s actual statement, and you thanked Osmosis for providing false, unreferenced information. What the hell is wrong with you?

I’ve just gone back to the FBI data and now, in addition to all the above, I can now add that you’re spreading false figures yourself. If you add up all the relationship murders where the sex of the victim can be ascertained, the male:female murder rate is 748:1360, or about 1:2. The only way you could get your numbers was to include boyfriends killed in the male count, but to exclude girlfriends killed from the female count.

One of the most amazing statistics I’ve heard is that from the early 70s to the late 80s or 90s (forget when the study period ended), intimate partner murders of men by women fell by nearly 2/3rds. Intimate partner murders of women by men stayed roughly even.

Browne and Williams (1989) examined the effects of domestic violence services and legislation on intimate-partner homicide rates using state-level cross-sectional data. Their findings indicate some policy impact: greater service availability is significantly associated with a lower rate of married women killing their husbands. However, service availability was not found to be related to lower rates of men killing their wives (see Browne, Williams, & Dutton 1999 for discussion). The finding of divergent effects of domestic violence services on intimate-partner homicide by gender was replicated in a longitudinal analysis of intimate-partner homicide victimization in 29 large U.S. cities (Dugan, Nagin, & Rosenfeld 1999). The authors found that legal advocacy services are associated with reduced victimization for married men, but not for women (Dugan, Nagin, & Rosenfeld 1999).

The above studies reach an ironic conclusion: resources
designed to protect women from violent men appear to have a
stronger role in keeping men from being killed by their partners.
Men’s homicidal behavior toward female intimates statistically
remains the same regardless of the amount of resources available to battered women. Although there are clear social benefits to
averting both the murder of men and the likely incarceration of
the female perpetrator, the null female findings suggest that policy enhancements are needed to dramatically increase the safety of women in relationships with men.

Wait… it is acceptable to hate all women for the actions of a few, but unacceptable to implicate men who engage in misogyny for giving support and acceptance to men who go from words to deeds, who use violent hateful language as a springboard to violent hateful actions?

All right, this is ridiculous. I do not apologize for misogyny in any way, but if PZ’s post was meant to be a “memorial service”, then he misappropriated it himself when he chose to end it with an extremely inflammatory statement.

Damn right it was inflammatory. If you are the people PZ cited in his post, you’re SUPPOSED to be bothered.

But, vaiyt – who cares about what he actually writes in his posts? If they’re bothered it’s only because they disagree with PZ!

@181,

Wait… it is acceptable to hate all women for the actions of a few, but unacceptable to implicate men who engage in misogyny for giving support and acceptance to men who go from words to deeds, who use violent hateful language as a springboard to violent hateful actions?

Well, duh. Whenever men treat women in general as subhuman and deserving of violence they’re just having fun, but the moment they act on that jovial perspective they magically transform into “lone crazies” due to some clinically inexplicable neural burst of insanity which puts the TOTALLY CRAZY idea in their head! Where did that come from?! Who knows! Don’t you know that “killer, therefore mental illness” automatically eliminates cultural factors from the equation?

So, 6 face trial. Out of a crowd of dozens of “bystanders” who watched and recorded an hours-long gang-rape.

I wonder if any of them needed to “go think about it” before they could decide if they were morally culpable.
I can picture it now, I’m driving along and the car in front of me goes off the road and rolls 2 or 3 times. I’ll have to pull over and sit and have a think about whether or not I need to help the occupants.
Or when that cyclist got hit by a truck in front of my house when I was in the back yard and I was first on the scene.. maybe I should have meditated on whether or not I ‘had’ to render assistance before offering even a band-aid.
Gosh golly, there are just so many moral and ethical considerations one has to deal with before they can decide what the correct action to take is!

Yeah, you’re right: hate speech against individual women based on their gender isn’t the same as being a mass murderer. But it feeds those who commit the murders. And when you post online, or shoot the misogynistic shit in a bar, or complain “all in fun” among friends, they are listening to you, and deciding that you’ve got their backs.

It reminds me of that temple shooting. Everyone apparently knew the future shooter was a goddamn neo-nazi and quite often expressed how he wanted to commit violence against minorities…and then those fuckers had the nerve to say they didn’t think he was violent at the time. A LITERAL NAZI

I’m not sure where you’re getting your stats from but they don’t add up to me.

That’s because they’re about ten years old, methinks. Mine were FBI stats too, from 2001 think. From what I can gather, and from what seems reasonble and necessary, the number fluctuates fairly wildly.
So yeah, I know the numbers I quoted were “conservatve” to say the least, but it was true ten years ago. (I don’t know how you came up with such newer data than I did, I only checked it out less than a year ago.)
Alas, the newer data seems to indicates things have not improved.

Browne and Williams (1989) examined the effects of domestic violence services and legislation on intimate-partner homicide rates using state-level cross-sectional data. Their findings indicate some policy impact: greater service availability is significantly associated with a lower rate of married women killing their husbands. However, service availability was not found to be related to lower rates of men killing their wives

It’s kind of ironic that the group profiting the most in some sense from women’s shelters is abusive husbands…

Joe
But didn’t you understand?
If one woman ever does as much as absentmindedly ignoring your right of way, it’s OK to deem the whole gender inferior and unfit for driving and such. But if a guy engages in toxic misogynist behaviour you have to establish that he was nasty in all instances and situations. If you ever find a puppy he didn’t kick, you’re not justified in even wagging your finger.

Indeed it does, but while feeding that culture is terrible, it is not the equivalent of gunning people down.

Sniveling about how we’re not nice enough to misogynists fits pretty squarely in the realm of apologia, fyi.

Did you not read my comment? I’m not saying to be nicer to misogynists; heck, be meaner, just be consistent about it.

If you find a statement condemning misogyny “inflammatory” you’ve got problems I can’t help you with.

So as long as a statement is condemning misogyny, it gets a pass from criticism, regardless of its content? I understand that many here are very passionate about feminism, but you can’t let that passion cloud your ability to reason. Misogyny is a huge problem which needs to be dealt with, but taking an “any means necessary” approach will only serve to undermine your credibility. You yourself seemed to admit in your post that PZ’s statement was a bit over the top.

On a more general note, the amount of suspicion and hostility I seem to be drawing simply for voicing a dissenting opinion is… surprising. Are we not all skeptics here? Do we not know that external criticism is to be welcomed as a possible chance to improve ourselves? We are all human beings who make mistakes, but if we attack everyone who tries to point out a perceived error, how will we ever correct them?

Also, as much as I like bunnies, I do think that giving me a warning was a bit over-reactive. I see plenty of other comments which seem way more “mean” than mine, the only difference being that they agree with the post. I remember when Pharyngula comments ranged from friendly conversation to mass exchanges of pure vitriol; when did everyone here become so thin-skinned?

On a more general note, the amount of suspicion and hostility I seem to be drawing simply for voicing a dissenting opinion is… surprising. – XA-26843

If you’re being honest, that’s just because you’re an idiot. If you’ve been reading the blog for years, as you claim, you must be well aware of the frequency with which commenters “simply… voicing a dissenting opinion” on posts about feminism andor misogyny, turn out to be the vilest type of misogynist themselves.

Talking about the evils of misogyny is one thing, but comparing internet misogynists (who, granted, are crappy people) to spree-murderers is a bit beyond the realm of “memorial service”.

More elision. This really wasn’t a random spree-murder. It was specifically aimed at the female engineering students who he felt were usurping men’s places. I had just graduated from engineering when this happened: I was quite shaken, because these women were killed because they dared to step outside traditional female roles in exactly the same way I did.
In my professional capacity, I am well aware that catastrophic failure is rarely caused by a single component going wrong: there are almost always contributory factors. The misogynists that you are providing cover for are contributory factors.

Talking about the evils of misogyny is one thing, but comparing internet misogynists (who, granted, are crappy people) to spree-murderers is a bit beyond the realm of “memorial service”.

Oh, I’m sure our internet warriors against women would stop short of actual murder… rape, beatings, stalking, harassment and bullying, however, are fair game, right? In that case, dead women are just collateral damage, I guess.

The difference between them and the mass murderer, is that the mass murderer took their ideology to its logical conclusion,

Ok sure, but
I think one of the ways a person would instantly interpret this infographic is that very rare events – such as a terrorist attack – or acts that our culture valorizes (not a word? sorry) – dying during war – get more attention than mundane tragedies. That’s sad because so many more people get hurt in other, more mundane, tragedies, but they should not count any less. So the graphic gets that point across.

But the graphic doesn’t get anything across about gender per se. It doesn’t show a gender imbalance in, say, the victims of crime or risk in relationships. That gender imbalance is implied. But instead of implying it, Chris could actually show it.

If you’re being honest, that’s just because you’re an idiot. If you’ve been reading the blog for years, as you claim, you must be well aware of the frequency with which commenters “simply… voicing a dissenting opinion” on posts about feminism andor misogyny, turn out to be the vilest type of misogynist themselves.

There you go, assuming the worst about me yet again and flinging insults my way. Did you ever consider that, perhaps, I generally don’t read the comments? That, maybe, I read the blog on an RSS feed on my phone? Now you apologize like an adult.

It’s hyperbole, just as your quoted sentence is rhetorical understatement.

My point from the beginning wasn’t that PZ shouldn’t have said it, it was that because he used an inflammatory piece of hyperbole, Chris can’t use the “memorial service” nature of the post to reprimand people for making a fuss over it.

More elision. This really wasn’t a random spree-murder. It was specifically aimed at the female engineering students who he felt were usurping men’s places. I had just graduated from engineering when this happened: I was quite shaken, because these women were killed because they dared to step outside traditional female roles in exactly the same way I did.

I likely could never truly understand the emotional impact this incident had on you, and I hope you’ll forgive me if I’ve come across as insensitive. I did not intend to imply that the act was somehow random; my concept of “spree murderer” extends to those with specific, pre-meditated targets, such as disgruntled, mentally disturbed employees who shoot up their workplace.

In my professional capacity, I am well aware that catastrophic failure is rarely caused by a single component going wrong: there are almost always contributory factors. The misogynists that you are providing cover for are contributory factors.

I cannot emphasize enough that my purpose here is not to provide cover for misogynists. All I wanted to do was call attention to what I felt like was a bit of inconsistency in this post; the fact that it related to misogyny is beside the point.

The author of the comment you are responding to is Chris Clarke, who is also the author of the Original Post.
Not PZ Myers.

PZ wrote the post “Never Forget”, Chris wrote the post “A Metaobservation on Misogyny”. I don’t think I ever implied otherwise.

Oh, I’m sure our internet warriors against women would stop short of actual murder… rape, beatings, stalking, harassment and bullying, however, are fair game, right? In that case, dead women are just collateral damage, I guess.

Like anything else, I suspect misogynists exist on a spectrum. Some of them dislike women a lot, but would never actually do anything about it (for many possible reasons, be they cowardice or even some sense of morality). Some are full-on nutcases who have no issues with harming women. And some are probably just trolling. You do yourself a disservice when you over-simplify your enemy.

If you’re offended by the comparison, I don’t fucking care. Here’s the world’s smallest violin, play a sad song for yourself.

As I’ve said before, I’m not offended by it. Complaining about the comparison was never the point of my comment. I feel like people are just skimming my words and looking for something to attack while ignoring the rest. Reminds me of a Simon & Garfunkle song.

Also, as a future note to anyone responing to my comments, please take the time to first read them all carefully and understand what I’m actually trying to say. I’m happy to receive criticism, so long as it’s directed at my actual position, and not a strawman of it. If anyone thinks I’ve been unclear and need to clarify some wording, please let me know.

I would also like to call attention to a few of the responses I received; if my original comment warranted a warning, surely some of the crap tossed my way does as well.

Like anything else, I suspect misogynists exist on a spectrum. Some of them dislike women a lot, but would never actually do anything about it (for many possible reasons, be they cowardice or even some sense of morality). Some are full-on nutcases who have no issues with harming women. And some are probably just trolling. You do yourself a disservice when you over-simplify your enemy.

To say they do nothing is wrong. Don’t they meet women through their lives? Don’t they have opportunity to exercise power and authority over women, or inversely, have women in positions of power and authority around them? If so, their views are relevant, because they will color their actions. Even the odd one who thinks women suck but keeps the expression of that belief entirely inside mysoginist forums (what are the chances?), is doing something by giving tacit approval to the more rabid ones.

Anyway, in the end, it doesn’t matter. The difference between them is merely of degree, not quality. I don’t care if they “only” hate women, if they want to kill them, or if they think we should just sit and discuss whether women are human over tea and crumpets. They’re all fetid slime. They fail to cross the minimum bar of basic decency.

Did you ever consider that, perhaps, I generally don’t read the comments? That, maybe, I read the blog on an RSS feed on my phone?

But you say@191:

I remember when Pharyngula comments ranged from friendly conversation to mass exchanges of pure vitriol

How do you remember that if you don’t generally read the comments?

Moreover, previously you said, in reference to the current post:

To complain about other people commenting in response to what PZ said because they shifted attention away from the memory of the victims is incredibly hypocritical.

I really expected better of a blog I’ve been reading for years.

Now if you’ve been reading the blog for years, you will know that Chris Clarke is a relatively recent addition – so why would you have any expectations of him? The blog itself doesn’t write anything, so saying you’d expect better of “the blog” is just weird. You would also know, even without reading the comments, that PZ himself has repeatedly drawn attention to the phenomenon I referred to: that vile misogynists habitually arrive in threads having anything to do with misogyny or feminism, pretending just to disagree with some specific point, or the tone of something, only to let their true feelings emerge later.

I conclude that you are, in fact, lying; so no apology is due.

My point from the beginning wasn’t that PZ shouldn’t have said it, it was that because he used an inflammatory piece of hyperbole, Chris can’t use the “memorial service” nature of the post to reprimand people for making a fuss over it.

Liar again: you spent most of your comment #191 complaining about PZ’s “inflammatory” comparison of misogynists in general with the murderer.

To say they do nothing is wrong. Don’t they meet women through their lives? Don’t they have opportunity to exercise power and authority over women, or inversely, have women in positions of power and authority around them? If so, their views are relevant, because they will color their actions. Even the odd one who thinks women suck but keeps the expression of that belief entirely inside mysoginist forums (what are the chances?), is doing something by giving tacit approval to the more rabid ones.

I’m sorry, you are correct to point out that saying they do nothing is wrong. What I meant was that they do nothing physical; I should have been more clear on that. I do not wish to downplay the damage done by verbal misogyny, but I do think that saying reprehensible things is categorically different from physically attacking someone.

How do you remember that if you don’t generally read the comments?

I haven’t always had my phone and its RSS app; years ago I read the blog on my PC and would occasionally peruse the comments.

Now if you’ve been reading the blog for years, you will know that Chris Clarke is a relatively recent addition – so why would you have any expectations of him? The blog itself doesn’t write anything, so saying you’d expect better of “the blog” is just weird.

So if a respected publication hires a new employee who then makes a mistake, it would be wrong to say you expected better of said publication? I know that Chris is new, and I’ve enjoyed most of his writing, but I would expect him to live up to the standards of this blog.

You would also know, even without reading the comments, that PZ himself has repeatedly drawn attention to the phenomenon I referred to: that vile misogynists habitually arrive in threads having anything to do with misogyny or feminism, pretending just to disagree with some specific point, or the tone of something, only to let their true feelings emerge later.

I conclude that you are, in fact, lying; so no apology is due.

I’m afraid I don’t commit every single post to memory, and I’m much less likely to recall a post about the comments, which I’m generally not concerned with. I am starting to wonder if the hysterical response some commenters have gotten drove some of them to troll as a form of retaliation. I can certainly see how the atmosphere here would alienate would-be allies and generally piss people off.

Liar again: you spent most of your comment #191 complaining about PZ’s “inflammatory” comparison of misogynists in general with the murderer.

I’ve already addressed this multiple times. It’s likely that this is the last time I’ll be responding to you; this whole time all you have done is attack my character while ignoring the points I’ve raised. It’s clear to me that you’ve already made up your mind about what I am and there is no amount of evidence I can present to convince you otherwise. I swear it’s like I’m arguing with a creationist.

I will reiterate, if anyone wishes to respond to my comments, please take the time to first read them all carefully and understand what I’m actually trying to say. I’ll also ask again that some of the comments I’ve received be considered for moderation; this is starting to look really bad.

Indeed it does, but while feeding that culture is terrible, it is not the equivalent of gunning people down.

Does the word “enabler” mean anything to you? How about “empower” and “sanction”? The misogynists create an atmosphere of approval of the killers’ and rapists’ actions. People like you who claim there’s a vast gap between telling rape jokes and killing women are enablers.

I’ve already addressed this multiple times. It’s likely that this is the last time I’ll be responding to you; this whole time all you have done is attack my character while ignoring the points I’ve raised – XA-26483

Lying again: I have not ignored your points.

I know that Chris is new, and I’ve enjoyed most of his writing, but I would expect him to live up to the standards of this blog.

It’s not you who defines “the standards of this blog”, you pompous puffball. It’s primarily PZ, secondarily the regular commentariat; evidently, neither share your view of either this post, or PZ’s.

I’m afraid I don’t commit every single post to memory, and I’m much less likely to recall a post about the comments, which I’m generally not concerned with. I am starting to wonder if the hysterical response some commenters have gotten drove some of them to troll as a form of retaliation. I can certainly see how the atmosphere here would alienate would-be allies and generally piss people off.

It is quite clear that you have not been reading this blog for years, as you claimed, as you could not possibly have missed the many posts by PZ in which he excoriates the “What about the menz” brigade of misogynists. Whines about alienating would-be allies (and of course, misogynists are not would-be allies at all) are a frequent – indeed, more or less an invariable – theme of such trolls; what a remarkable coincidence!

GIve it up. There has never been a time in US history when husbands murdered is near parity with wives murdered. Either your memory is in error or you’ve swallowed some false stats from an MRA, but either way it’s time to accept that your original comment was wrong and you’re not doing yourself any favours by doubling down on it.

This is how it goes. If you disagree with anything on Pharyngula, make your point as nicely as you can, in the full knowledge you will be outnumbered 50:1 by a group of regulars who are allowed to post to… [bla, bla, bla, etc.]

noelplum99’s rant could be included in his Dungeon description but its kinda long.
and whiny
—-
XA-26483
You probably still have a chance…
as long as you disregard noelplum99 because he is a whiny, suckybaby.

Don’t bother answering – i understand how revelatory belief works, you *know* you are right so why bother discussing anything, right?

This from a pointless evidenceless tone trolling asshole? Try leading with EVIDENCE, not just your OPINION. But then, we all know MRAs have nothing but OPINION and ATTITUDE, so there is nothing to discuss.

I’ve been reading blogs for years, but even after all that time I’ve never managed to understand why so many of them are so damn dependant on having people read their shitty comments, and get so mouth-frothingly enraged when that privilege is denied them.

My point from the beginning wasn’t that PZ shouldn’t have said it, it was that because he used an inflammatory piece of hyperbole, Chris can’t use the “memorial service” nature of the post to reprimand people for making a fuss over it.

I love that the main objection from these jokes appears to be, “These two things are not the same, so HOW DARE YOU COMPARE THEM! They are not the same thing!” As Brownian pointed out, that is pretty much the point of comparing things–taking two things that aren’t exactly the same and pointing out their similarities AND their differences.

I’ve just gone back to the FBI data and now, in addition to all the above, I can now add that you’re spreading false figures yourself. If you add up all the relationship murders where the sex of the victim can be ascertained, the male:female murder rate is 748:1360, or about 1:2. The only way you could get your numbers was to include boyfriends killed in the male count, but to exclude girlfriends killed from the female count.

…you’re right, I’m a moron, and I apologize for being incompetent at Excel. I don’t see any way to edit previous comments to fix my error, so all I can do is leave this apology for spreading misinformation.

War on women huh? How many more men live in poverty in the US than women? How many women get away with hiring someone to kill their husbands/ boyfriends? How many men are denied the title of rape victims because their rapist was a women? Everyone has problems but to say one side has it worse is simply lying.

Yawn, more opinion by TVF, which is *FLOOSH* sent to the toxic waste system. Try this search engine for real evidence, which isn’t your opinion: Google Scholar. And do your homework before you show how ignorant and potentially sexist you are.